Jump to content

Could two more Brisbane teams be added to the NRL?


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

What's the NRL's thought process behind the idea that Brisbane2 will unlock thousands more NRL fans in the city? 

If someone has an attachment to one of the older clubs, those people aren't going to switch en masse to Brisbane2, other than maybe the core club itself, which just isn't that many. 

Whereas if someone is looking to get into league, isn't the Broncos still the entry point?

I get from a TV perspective it might have some value. 

I don’t think they are really doing it to ‘unlock thousands more nrl fans’. It’s more to give current rugby league supporters in Brisbane who don’t support the Broncos a team to support. 

Brisbane is arguably the most rugby league fanatical city/town on the planet so I can’t imagine that many general sports fans in the city are not NRL fans.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 hours ago, AB90 said:

I don’t think they are really doing it to ‘unlock thousands more nrl fans’. It’s more to give current rugby league supporters in Brisbane who don’t support the Broncos a team to support. 

Brisbane is arguably the most rugby league fanatical city/town on the planet so I can’t imagine that many general sports fans in the city are not NRL fans.

I'm interested to learn why, if someone's already an NRL fan in Brisbane, they don't they support the Broncos?

I understand that there's a group of fans of the old BRL clubs who've never liked the Broncos due to what they believe to be the negative effect the founding of the Broncos had on other clubs in the area.

But I don't see why they'd start following an alternative NRL team any more than they would follow the Broncos. 

I don't quite get who these 15-20k NRL fans in the Brisbane area are, that want to closely follow an NRL team, attend NRL games, but not the Broncos. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Toby Chopra said:

I'm interested to learn why, if someone's already an NRL fan in Brisbane, they don't they support the Broncos?

I understand that there's a group of fans of the old BRL clubs who've never liked the Broncos due to what they believe to be the negative effect the founding of the Broncos had on other clubs in the area.

But I don't see why they'd start following an alternative NRL team any more than they would follow the Broncos. 

I don't quite get who these 15-20k NRL fans in the Brisbane area are, that want to closely follow an NRL team, attend NRL games, but not the Broncos. 

Good question. I don’t really know why but there is a large part of the rugby league population in Brisbane that doesn’t support the Broncos. 

I guess they would follow the expansion team because they don’t like the Broncos. So they would support the team that in theory should be the Broncos bitter rival.

Plus it’s new, fresh, different, exciting etc. 

And as Suncorp Stadium is next to Brisbane’s CBD it attracts general foot traffic (especially the Friday night, after work city crowd) who will attend games as part of their Friday night festivities. Not all the 30,000 average crowd the Broncos attract are Broncos fans. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, BrisbaneRhino said:

Rocket - I don't think anyone cares about 'Redcliffe' fans travelling to Suncorp. There are maybe 2-300 at Redcliffe games. Fans will come from Brisbane generally.  Frankly nobody outside of Redcliffe will care that they are linked to the Dolphins.

I'd say the biggest problems for the new franchise are creating some kind of identity that appeals to enough fans to get them to turn up each week, and developing a roster that is competitive.

Yeah that's just wishful thinking... Simply not how in-group out-group psychology works.

BTW, linking the NRL team heavily with the Dolphin's legacy in Redcliffe isn't a good way to create an identity that appeals to potential fans outside of Redcliffe.

18 hours ago, BrisbaneRhino said:

I'd say the biggest problems for the new franchise are creating some kind of identity that appeals to enough fans to get them to turn up each week, and developing a roster that is competitive. As an aside it will be interesting to understand the NRL's view on developing players. There's a big gap top to bottom in the NRL now, so where are we going to find 25-30 new NRL standard players?

Sure talent will be an issue, but the current disparity in the NRL isn't simply because of a lack of talent because even when the top teams play each other there're regularly blow outs.

It's pretty obvious that the new rules are a big part of the issue, but I also think that covid forcing the lower tiers to be abandoned two years in a row leaving the teams reserves without a place to keep match fit is a big part of the issue as well. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Toby Chopra said:

I'm interested to learn why, if someone's already an NRL fan in Brisbane, they don't they support the Broncos?

I understand that there's a group of fans of the old BRL clubs who've never liked the Broncos due to what they believe to be the negative effect the founding of the Broncos had on other clubs in the area.

But I don't see why they'd start following an alternative NRL team any more than they would follow the Broncos. 

I don't quite get who these 15-20k NRL fans in the Brisbane area are, that want to closely follow an NRL team, attend NRL games, but not the Broncos. 

 

4 hours ago, AB90 said:

Good question. I don’t really know why but there is a large part of the rugby league population in Brisbane that doesn’t support the Broncos. 

As far as I know, a lot of the dislike comes from the Broncos being the key club involved in the Super League Wars which really negatively impacted the game in Australia. 

There's also the argument that it isn't about getting fans in the stadium. As far as I know Brisbane rate very strongly compared to other clubs, and potentially another Brisbane club would do the same.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Toby Chopra said:

I'm interested to learn why, if someone's already an NRL fan in Brisbane, they don't they support the Broncos?

I understand that there's a group of fans of the old BRL clubs who've never liked the Broncos due to what they believe to be the negative effect the founding of the Broncos had on other clubs in the area.

But I don't see why they'd start following an alternative NRL team any more than they would follow the Broncos. 

I don't quite get who these 15-20k NRL fans in the Brisbane area are, that want to closely follow an NRL team, attend NRL games, but not the Broncos. 

Oversimplifying a bit, but it's because the Broncos are a very unlikeable team with a history of being antagonistic to a lot of RL institutions, particularly in Brisbane.

A lot of people don't like their corporate nature and their direct connections with News Corp and the Murdoch family either.

You also get a lot of expats in Brisbane whom are interested in regularly attending NRL games and supporting a local team as their 'second team', but simply can't bring themselves to support the Broncos or regularly attend their games and aren't willing to travel down to the GC to watch the Titans.

There're also tons of people whom only follow SOO, whom, at least theoretically, could be converted into NRL fans with a bit of persuasion, but they're probably the most amorphous and disparate group.

So yeah, there're a lot of people in Brisbane whom could become fans of the new club, tens of thousands of them in fact, the problem is creating a team that can appeal to enough of them to make it worthwhile, because if the NRL do it wrong we could end up with another club with no fans squatting on a license, and that's the last thing the NRL needs more of.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Saint 1 said:

As far as I know, a lot of the dislike comes from the Broncos being the key club involved in the Super League Wars which really negatively impacted the game in Australia. 

You still get some older blokes holding grudges from the SL war, but it's increasingly rare and most of those people wouldn't be interested in supporting a new club anyway.

It's more of a thing in Sydney as well.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Great Dane said:

You still get some older blokes holding grudges from the SL war, but it's increasingly rare and most of those people wouldn't be interested in supporting a new club anyway.

It's more of a thing in Sydney as well.

Yeah I figured as much. Obviously Wynnum, Souths Logan and Norths all have feeder club partnerships with the Broncos too so you'd think there's no bitterness from those teams either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/08/2021 at 05:04, Saint 1 said:

Yeah I figured as much. Obviously Wynnum, Souths Logan and Norths all have feeder club partnerships with the Broncos too so you'd think there's no bitterness from those teams either.

Most of the time affiliate clubs are marriages of necessity or convenience, and not because the clubs or their supporters have any particular love for each other. Club affiliations also change all the time as better or more convenient deals become available, which makes developing strong relationships between the two clubs fanbases difficult.

In other words, the clubs above would have no qualms taking a better deal with the new club (or any of the other NRL clubs) when their deal with the Broncos expires, and fans of second tier clubs are no more likely to support their club's NRL affiliate than they are any other NRL club.

Edited by The Great Dane
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The Daddy said:

How does it make them stronger?

Functionally it doesn't really make the Firehawks stronger.

Nothing is gained from a merger that couldn't be achieved without it, except that it throws all their financial resources behind one bid instead of three. But it'll also make the club an organisational mess unless it's a merger in name only, and one of the members effectively takes over the others.

To put it in other terms, they're really running the risk that the club will be all the worst dysfunction of the Sydney mergers on roids, and the last thing the NRL needs is Brisbane's answer to the Wests Tigers, or worse, the Northern Eagles.

But unfortunately a lot of people seem to have it in their heads that the bid that has the largest financial resources is the bid that should win the license, which is stupid on the face of it as a lot more goes into a successful team than just it's financial backing, but also seems to have pushed the Firehawks to at least hear the Jets/Bombers/Western Corridor bid out, because they've only got $80mil in assets to the Dolphins $100mil.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, and obviously none of us has the full scope on the exact details of the bids, none of them look brilliant - from a distance anyway. Redcliffe intuitively feels the strongest but there must be question marks over them given the aim is to have a team play out of Lang Park. Firehawks has the location but clearly isn't as strong as Redcliffe in other respects, which is emphasised by this talk of merger at a ridiculously late stage. Ipswich has the player base but not a lot else. I'd hoped someone would come along and really wow us with their bid but, going by the information that's been made public, that isn't the case. They all feel like a very noticeable compromise.

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, nadera78 said:

To be honest, and obviously none of us has the full scope on the exact details of the bids, none of them look brilliant - from a distance anyway. Redcliffe intuitively feels the strongest but there must be question marks over them given the aim is to have a team play out of Lang Park. Firehawks has the location but clearly isn't as strong as Redcliffe in other respects, which is emphasised by this talk of merger at a ridiculously late stage. Ipswich has the player base but not a lot else. I'd hoped someone would come along and really wow us with their bid but, going by the information that's been made public, that isn't the case. They all feel like a very noticeable compromise.

Easts have always said they were open to working with other clubs on a joint bid, and that they'd at least hear them out. It's also pretty obvious from what has been doing the rounds that they aren't the ones pushing for the merger.

I also don't see what the Dolphins bid has over the others, aside from a strong PR department that seems to have convinced every journo on the planet that they are gods gift to man. Their bid is literally the living embodiment of everything that has held the sport back in this country.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, The Great Dane said:

Easts have always said they were open to working with other clubs on a joint bid, and that they'd at least hear them out. It's also pretty obvious from what has been doing the rounds that they aren't the ones pushing for the merger.

I also don't see what the Dolphins bid has over the others, aside from a strong PR department that seems to have convinced every journo on the planet that they are gods gift to man. Their bid is literally the living embodiment of everything that has held the sport back in this country.

Given everything you`ve written you`d have to think the Firehawks bid should be favourite.

Dolphins look great on paper but the distances to Suncorp and the aversion League fans have for travel sounds like a deal breaker. Seems to me that Dolphins may be best served by up-grading their own stadium and then take big games to Suncorp if necessary.

I`m not quite sure why Ipswich would want to merge with Firehawks, their council has promised them a 20 000 seat stadium, if they merge they eventually may want to unravel that merger when their area grows big enough to financially support a team. That sounds messy.

So it seems to me Firehawks are most likely to meet the NRL`s criteria of providing an alternative/rival to the Broncos, are based in Brisbane and seem financially solid. Is there something I`m missing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, The Rocket said:

Given everything you`ve written you`d have to think the Firehawks bid should be favourite.

Dolphins look great on paper but the distances to Suncorp and the aversion League fans have for travel sounds like a deal breaker. Seems to me that Dolphins may be best served by up-grading their own stadium and then take big games to Suncorp if necessary.

I`m not quite sure why Ipswich would want to merge with Firehawks, their council has promised them a 20 000 seat stadium, if they merge they eventually may want to unravel that merger when their area grows big enough to financially support a team. That sounds messy.

You've hit on the major problem with both the Redcliffe and Ipswich bids.

Both would work as a Redcliffe or Ipswich team, but neither would work very well as a Brisbane team, when what the NRL's really needs is another team that can represent Brisbane, not teams scattered across suburbs in Brisbane.

BTW, the Ipswich council doesn't have the resources to build the Jets an NRL standard stadium, that'd require state and federal funding that is unlikely to be forthcoming any time soon. In other words it's a pipedream. Same goes with any talk of upgrading Dolphins Stadium to NRL standard in the next couple of decades.

10 hours ago, The Rocket said:

So it seems to me Firehawks are most likely to meet the NRL`s criteria of providing an alternative/rival to the Broncos, are based in Brisbane and seem financially solid. Is there something I`m missing.

What you are missing is that the Dolphins have $100mil in assets and first-movers advantage, while the Firehawks only have $80mil in assets and $35mil in cash reserves, and a lot of people seem to be getting hung up on that fact.

Here's the thing though, even with "only" $80mil in assets and $35mil in cash, the Firehawks would still be the richest club in the NRL from day one of their joining. In other words they have more than enough money to fund launching a successful NRL team, and at that point the fact that the Dolphins have more assets is pretty meaningless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Great Dane said:

You've hit on the major problem with both the Redcliffe and Ipswich bids.

Both would work as a Redcliffe or Ipswich team, but neither would work very well as a Brisbane team, when what the NRL's really needs is another team that can represent Brisbane, not teams scattered across suburbs in Brisbane.

BTW, the Ipswich council doesn't have the resources to build the Jets an NRL standard stadium, that'd require state and federal funding that is unlikely to be forthcoming any time soon. In other words it's a pipedream. Same goes with any talk of upgrading Dolphins Stadium to NRL standard in the next couple of decades.

What you are missing is that the Dolphins have $100mil in assets and first-movers advantage, while the Firehawks only have $80mil in assets and $35mil in cash reserves, and a lot of people seem to be getting hung up on that fact.

Here's the thing though, even with "only" $80mil in assets and $35mil in cash, the Firehawks would still be the richest club in the NRL from day one of their joining. In other words they have more than enough money to fund launching a successful NRL team, and at that point the fact that the Dolphins have more assets is pretty meaningless.

I agree size of the difference in assets is neither here nor there with the Dolphins and Firehawks bids it`ll be whether they can fill or half fill Suncorp every second week that the TV networks and the NRL will be interested in and that`s why you`d have to think Firehawks were the best fit.

V`landy`s is real big on assets, before the pandemic there was a lot of talk by him questioning why our code which generates so much money yet don`t own anything, unlike our afl rivals, he probably sees the Dolphins as a role model for all clubs with their shopping centre amongst other things. He`d probably love to reward a club for being so far forward thinking. It`s a pity they can`t up-grade their stadium, I think you`ve compared them to Manly before and probably like Manly out on their peninsula is where they belong and are likely to do best.

There was an article in last weeks Australian saying the Firehawks have struck an an arrangement with Central Queensland:

The Jets also have a big development pool but question marks around their finances while the Firehawks have struck up relationships with central Queensland and Booval Swifts – one of the biggest clubs in Ipswich – as they look to demonstrate to the ARL Commission that they are intent on growing the game. (The Australian 22/8/2021)

So it looks like to me the NRL may have said to the Firehawks bid, we want to shore up League in that western corridor, if you bring that into your scope, the chances are you will get the nod. Makes sense I suppose, if Ipswich develops enough in the future then perhaps then they can go break off and go it alone. But in the meantime one of V`landy`s main priorities, apart from the club being successful, he wants to ward off encroachment by Leagues rivals into our territory. A combined Firehawks /Jets bid may satisfy him on that.

 

Edited by The Rocket
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Rocket said:

I agree size of the difference in assets is neither here nor there with the Dolphins and Firehawks bids it`ll be whether they can fill or half fill Suncorp every second week that the TV networks and the NRL will be interested in and that`s why you`d have to think Firehawks were the best fit.

V`landy`s is real big on assets, before the pandemic there was a lot of talk by him questioning why our code which generates so much money yet don`t own anything, unlike our afl rivals, he probably sees the Dolphins as a role model for all clubs with their shopping centre amongst other things. He`d probably love to reward a club for being so far forward thinking. It`s a pity they can`t up-grade their stadium, I think you`ve compared them to Manly before and probably like Manly out on their peninsula is where they belong and are likely to do best.

The funny thing about the whole 'the game lacks assets' thing is that V'landys, and the clubs, know damn well that the reason that the game hasn't built any assets over the last decade is because it's wasted the vast majority of it's money on club grants and bailing out broke clubs. In other words it's their fault that the game hasn't built any assets or invested in the future, they know it , and them making a stink about it was just them trying to shift the blame for the game's struggles onto somebody else.

Anyway, I could rant about that subject forever, but it's for another time.

4 hours ago, The Rocket said:

There was an article in last weeks Australian saying the Firehawks have struck an an arrangement with Central Queensland:

The Jets also have a big development pool but question marks around their finances while the Firehawks have struck up relationships with central Queensland and Booval Swifts – one of the biggest clubs in Ipswich – as they look to demonstrate to the ARL Commission that they are intent on growing the game. (The Australian 22/8/2021)

So it looks like to me the NRL may have said to the Firehawks bid, we want to shore up League in that western corridor, if you bring that into your scope, the chances are you will get the nod. Makes sense I suppose, if Ipswich develops enough in the future then perhaps then they can go break off and go it alone. But in the meantime one of V`landy`s main priorities, apart from the club being successful, he wants to ward off encroachment by Leagues rivals into our territory. A combined Firehawks /Jets bid may satisfy him on that.

 

Which is irrational as well.

Think about it for a second; the argument goes that RL needs a pro-teams directly representing basically every region of Brisbane to stop the AFL 'taking over', but the AFL doesn't have pro-teams directly representing any of those regions yet has still been able to push growth and grab ever increasing amounts of market share in just about every market north of the Victorian border.

They've been able to do that because their investment into grassroots and community football has kept pace with their expenditure, and they've increased investment into the grassroots in their 'expansion markets' in particular, while the NRL has neglected their grassroots and community footy for decades now. In other words if you want to take the fight to the AFL then that fight starts in the grassroots and ends in the grassroots, and though they'd undoubtedly help, you don't need a pro-club in every suburb to fight that battle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, the merger talks between the Firehawks and Jets have already stalled.

They went pretty much how I expected them to; the Firehawks offered the Jets a seat on the board and to feed the Ipswich catchment into the Firehawks, the Jets counted with a 50/50 split in ownership and control of the club as well as the team being named the Jets, and the Firehawks (rightfully) laughed in their faces.

It was inevitable really. The Firehawks held all the leverage and the Jets were always going to demand more representation than what they'd be bringing to the merger justified.

Edited by The Great Dane
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, The Great Dane said:

BTW, the merger talks between the Firehawks and Jets have already stalled.

They went pretty much how I expected them to; the Firehawks offered the Jets a seat on the board and to feed the Ipswich catchment into the Firehawks, the Jets counted with a 50/50 split in ownership and control of the club as well as the team being named the Jets, and the Firehawks (rightfully) laughed in their faces.

It was inevitable really. The Firehawks held all the leverage and the Jets were always going to demand more representation than what they'd be bringing to the merger justified.

Does this failed merger weaken both bids, especially from a pr perspective?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, The Daddy said:

Does this failed merger weaken both bids, especially from a pr perspective?

It really shouldn't, but it's hard to tell.

Any objective person should be able to see that a bad merger is the only realistic outcome of them merging unless the Jets basically give everything to the Firehawks, and that them not merging is probably a better outcome for both than a bad merger. The problem is that most people aren't objective...

Frankly, both of the Jets and FHs are in weak positions PR wise compared to the Dolphins, because for some reason the majority of the media think that the Dolphins can do no wrong, and give them nothing but uncritical positive media coverage.

The Dolphins released a report last night that they had commissioned, that literally said they were the best option for expansion because they'd be the club with the smallest fanbase playing out of the smallest venues, and as such would have the least impact on the other NRL clubs, and the Courier Mail somehow spun it so that that is a great thing.

In other words, they literally argued they'd be the best option because they'd be the smallest club, and as far as I can tell most people have bought it...

So yeah the PR war seems to be a losing one for the FHs and Jets, as it seems that the Dolphins have incriminating pictures of some people in power or something.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/08/2021 at 03:18, Saint 1 said:

 

As far as I know, a lot of the dislike comes from the Broncos being the key club involved in the Super League Wars which really negatively impacted the game in Australia. 

There's also the argument that it isn't about getting fans in the stadium. As far as I know Brisbane rate very strongly compared to other clubs, and potentially another Brisbane club would do the same.

Vlandys isnt doing this for the game..the motivation is for TV...hence why they only are admitting one club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...